My blah, blah, blah , comment to Lateralis was my concern for the length of his response. It appeared to be filibustering to me. He could have made his point much more concisely. And now that I know he is a teacher, he should understand. I am sure papers have been submitted to him where the author chose to use the most words possible to fill space. Students ramble on in their papers, and get far away from the topic.

If that offended Lateralis I apologize. I had been grading papers that day, and in my head I say blah, blah, blah, as I read overly lengthy papers written only to complete the required length of the paper.

My use of the term "ignorant" was appropriate to me. When you make a assumption, decision, or statement without all the information you appear ignorant. We all do this everyday. I make decisions and later find out that I did not have enough information. So yes I make 3-4 ignorant choices every day.

Lateralis assumed that if he insulted me I would be quiet. That was not a reasonable (hence ignorant) assumption .

And I will apologize one more time to the reader that reads this and says "Wow, Craig sure used a lot of words to make an insignificant point". I really did try to be brief.

The thought here is that you should have been ticketed, because the officer was trying to fill his quota and entrap you. But you just proved my point. The officer did not ticket you even though you did not have the license.

Without camera in hand the officer said he would have ticketed the guy. Yes, that is garbage law enforcement 101. If your not going to ticket someone because they have a camera, why should you give someone a ticket because they don't have one? If they don't have a camera then obviously their illegally collecting ? You cant stop and look at reptiles without taking their picture? I do it all the time. Selective law enforcement. The law In Cali Snowflake requires that you pay for the privilege to look and officers can pick and choose how they enforce that law. They justify this crap by categorizing things like road cruising and hiking as actively "hunting". WTF.

Under any circumstances it's ridiculous to charge someone with a misdemeanor for picking up a snake on a highway and looking at it. Why the fK should anyone ever have to pay a dime to drive down the street or hike and harmlessly interact reptiles ? Let alone species that are as common as baitfish. Your already paying for the road, the land, the privilege to drive etc. Its one thing if your collecting but its insane to charge someone for a license to ride around and look for stuff. Its government overreach and typifies the absolute insanity that has permeated ever facet of the Land Of the Free.

Ernie in a lot of ways you are correct.I pay to license and register my car.I pay to park my car(in almost every place).I have a fast pass, so I pay more to get places faster.I pay the highest gasoline tax in the land. I pay to use our national parks and state parks. I pay sales tax (higher in L.A. county). I pay for grocery bags now, or bring my own cooler to the store. I pay income tax.I pay Ca. recycling tax when I buy soft drinks. And don't kid yourself the state is making money. You don't get your nickel back. Luckily I don't smoke cigarettes, they are heavily taxed. I pay airport tax when I fly.I pay extra hotel tax when I stay overnight herping. I pay extra to use my credit card in some places, because they want cash.

Those are just what I could think of in the last ten minutes or so. Feel free to add more that I missed. What do you pay?

If you are actively fishing, even just to look and then release, you still need the license. To me, I see the same thing here. I still agree that this is ridiculous, that one should be able to stop and remove an animal from a dangerous road without having to pay for the privilege to do so. This is what I assumed when I did not carry a license, but sadly it is not true.

What if I bring someone with me who is interested but not looking to take or touch anything? How is this any different than spotting an animal while hiking?

You for pay Law enforcements salaries and everything else from the money you work for. When someone go's to court they are the ones paying LE to show up and try to hang them. All the expenses come from your tax money. If LE makes a dirty bust and the persons found completely innocent. LE still keeps whatever money they took. They still get paid. You don't get anything back not even an apology.

Quote:

You are there and stopping for snakes means you are actively hunting.If you are actively fishing, even just to look and then release, you still need the license. To me, I see the same thing here.

The difference is sport Fishing and hunting is big business for Fish and Wildlife management. Fish and Wildlife invest a lot to keep that business in high gear. The money generated by license sales goes to maintaining the sport fishing and hunting industry's. That's where their bread gets buttered. For all practical purposes Fish and Wildlife don't put a dime into reptiles. They will argue that Hunting and Fishing are umbrella projects that benefit everyone that's enjoys nature. That is a load of crap. Except for patrolling marginalized areas Fish and Wildlife don't do anything in 99% of the places enjoyed by herpers except maintain legal jurisdiction over it. There is zero investment in these places.

And then there's all the built in gray areas that allow for manipulation of the law. If your out driving and a snake happens across the road. You don't need a license to stop for that. You don't need a Sport Fishing License to road cruise for rattlesnakes but you need one to stop for a leaf-nosed snake ? Birders don't need a license to "hunt"for birds, neither do whale watchers (who touch whales), or any other wildlife watchers, and they are all "pursuing" wildlife.

Nice ruber. We got one there last Friday afternoon. Seventy three degrees and sunny. I'm curious of yours came from the same stretch of the road. (every one ive heard of being found there is from.a very short stretch of the road)

On another note, I personally think whitewater is way overrated. Only reason we went there last Friday was it was on our way back toward Santa Ana airport . There's plenty of better spots imo

I agree with both the last 2 posters - Whitewater can be a plenty fun place, and, it's IMO also overrated or just talked about way more than it deserves. There's so much desert out there to enjoy. I went to a sweet spot over the recent holiday weekend and was frankly disappointed to see as many as 3 other parties (5 persons in total) the whole time. Why somebody would go to a place that's overrun with people, I can't fathom.

Just a shout-out:

Quote:

For $47.01, you can hunt Whitewater for 365 days LEGALLY. Why wouldn't you buy it?

Exactly. Can you take a date to a 2-hour movie, and buy you each a popcorn and drink for that? Maybe, but not necessarily. Depends where you live and what theater you go to. But you can hunt (herp) a whole state for thousands of hours, for that much. Or that little...

As for this:

Quote:

For all practical purposes Fish and Wildlife don't put a dime into reptiles. They will argue that Hunting and Fishing are umbrella projects that benefit everyone that's enjoys nature. That is a load of crap. Except for patrolling marginalized areas Fish and Wildlife don't do anything in 99% of the places enjoyed by herpers except maintain legal jurisdiction over it. There is zero investment in these places.

I will attest that "Fish and Wildlife" encompasses a federal agency and I think 57 state and territorial ones (56, plus PA has 2 - one fish or "boat", one "game"). I'm probably under-counting, as I suspect some coastal states still have a separate marine fisheries agency, as Florida once did. Plus you could throw in NMFS as another federal "fish" (and whales, sea turtles, etc) agency. So the sweeping indictment is, well, sweeping. In some cases quite true, at least when it comes to some states (not true of either NMFS or FWS) hardly putting a dime into herps. That's largely a function of the state F&G/F&W revenue model - "user pays". Herpers are users, they should pay. This is why I (also) always argue, "Just buy the license, dummy". Until you're paying, you're not contributing much to management, you're largely a free rider. Don't blame the executive branch, blame the legislative branch if you've got a beef. And get out that wallet.

Here's some data for Florida, where Ernie lives and presumably plays outside a little - this is the budget for their Division of Habitat and Species Conservation. I used to work in HSC. They're now spending about $110 million a year on...wait for it!!!

Habitat and Species Conservation.

This, in Florida's case, explicitly and intentionally includes a lot of herps and a lot of herp habitat, from sandhills to steephead ravines, from seagrass beds to mangroves. OK, so $20 mil is salaries and benefits for 365 full-time equivalents (2000 hrs/yr = 1 FTE). The other $90 mil - a year - is on habitat management, species conservation planning, impact analysis and review, etc. None of that stuff does itself, so don't bitch about the head count. State fish and wildlife employees bust their asses for crap pay - well under the national median - while being required to have way more than the median amount of expensive education and training to do A WHOLE LOT of pretty specialized and special work.

Until you're paying, you're not contributing much to management, you're largely a free rider. Don't blame the executive branch, blame the legislative branch if you've got a beef. And get out that wallet.

As it was clearly explained you already are paying and paying and paying. Its not worth dissecting another one of JIMI's high horse rant's in detail. Suffice to say as already stated. They will argue that Hunting and Fishing are umbrella projects that benefit everyone that enjoys nature. That is a load of crap. In the case of Cali-Snowflake commercial reptile collecting was banned in the late 70's, personal bag limits set in the early 80's. They cherry picked species to include and exclude with no data. F&W have not done a single thing with any of those species. No, they do not put a dime into reptile management. They use tax money taken from All of us "free riders" to PAY for everything. The only time they do anything with reptiles is to solicit Outsourced information paid for by us, the "free rider's" to base restrictive legislation on. So then they can tell us free riders that we need to pay them more. They force a selected group to pay extra for the privilege of hiking and picture taking on public land, driving down public roads that are..... wait for it!!! Paid for by us. The " free riders ". You need a $50 license to road cruise a shovel nosed snake but you don't need one to do the exact same thing to look for rattlesnakes. You need your head examined if you cant see what going on with this nonsense. They are the free riders not the causal herp enthusiast who have already paid more then their fair share time and time again only to be singled out and targeted.

First off, note this total annual revenue sum represents about $19 apiece, every year, for each man woman and child residing in Florida. Round generously and call it a quarter dollar a day, forever, per nuclear family. Florida residents tell me - is it worth that princely sum, to have a whole staff of dedicated professionals managing your wildlife and land for you?

"Average Floridians' tax dollars" make up about 9% of the total annual revenue, from the General Revenue Fund, which is mostly from point-of-sale sales tax collections. So, like 2 cents per family per day. "OMG, I am paying out the nose here!!!" Ha ha ha, isn't that funny? OTOH over 90% of the year's bills at FWC are paid for by - in all likelihood - people other than "average Floridians". So-called Trust Funds are created by Legislatures and tend to have a very specific "color of money" that is collected and put into them. And, they also tend to have very specific uses to which those monies can be put.

If you register a boat in Florida, you'll pay some tax that goes into this fund. If you don't register a boat in Florida...you don't contribute to it. Simple. User (boater, in this case) pays. Most of this money goes to marine fishery management and research. A bit also goes to sea turtle protection. Which makes some sense, as boats do kill some sea turtles. Either through direct hull strike, through propeller impact, or via fishing gear interaction.

The thing people have a hard time understanding (or perhaps they just don't care for pesky details? maybe they just like to run around, mouth off, and be outraged all the time?) is that, while you may feel like you're paying and paying and paying, the diverse folks who deliver things to you mainly all get paid with different money. An analogy might illustrate:

Say you paid your water bill and your light bill, and you also kept your truck's gas tank filled and went to work. You've got food in the cupboards and beer in the fridge. But ah, crap, now your cable got shut off and you also need some new tires. "What the hell?!?!? I'm paying out the nose already!!!" Well, sure, maybe. But you didn't pay your cable bill, and you used up your tires going back and forth to work. The water company and the power company and the gas station aren't going to pay those for you. They already gave you something, and you paid for it. The other guys still need their money too, or they're gonna cut you off. They can't afford to just give you stuff for free. Maybe you want your neighbors to? Maybe you feel entitled? Whatever. Get out your wallet if you want to watch that TV and drive that truck.

As for California, I'm pretty darn sure Ernie isn't paying one red cent for anything that restricts herpers' access to herps in that state. Not sure what he's all butt-hurt about. I don't particularly like the regs there either, but there's a way to get them changed. Hollering like a butt-hurt victim on the internet isn't it.

Quote:

See the data and think for yourselves. Don't embrace alienation, resist it. Please, for your own sakes.

Say you paid your water bill and your light bill, and you also kept your truck's gas tank filled and went to work. You've got food in the cupboards and beer in the fridge. But ah, crap, now your cable got shut off and you also need some new tires. "What the hell?!?!? I'm paying out the nose already!!!

In short. If you want the wrong answer to any question ask JIMI. The logic of the above analogy perfectly sums up this dopes lack of reasoning. Those things listed are products purchased for personal use or paid services for private use. You buy something and privately own and use it [/u].

You pay the light bill, pay for the water bill for your private use. You can stand under a street lamp or get a drink from a public fountain and not have to pay an additional fee.

When you buy the tire you keep the tire and use it. Its your tire. You don't have to pay to look at tires. You need a driver's license to drive a car, not to look at cars or photograph them in public places. Sheesh...........We are talking about looking at wildlife in public places. Not collecting , not searching in National, State or municipal owned parks, not making private use of them. Looking at them in Public places. No person should ever be charged or restricted from interacting with common reptiles (of all things ) in any public place. Its ludicrous to think they should.

I SEE your point Ernie, if all you want to do is look at or shoot photos of wildlife. But truthfully, I "almost always" have to interact with that animal. The almost always means that I leave protected animals alone, I try not to interact with them. I try to photograph from about 20 feet away, and yet there is still a certain amount of visual interaction. I do try to limit that by use of vegetation and rock formations present.

But all that being said, I truly enjoy picking up wild kingsnakes and rosy boas. I really have no intention to collect them, but it really takes me back to my youth when I did collect a few. For this I need a fishing license. Just like I do when I catch and release fish.

I will even confess that I have taken two wild snakes in the last decade. Both legally, both for use in education, and more than that for my own collection. They are both still in my collection, and I use them (along with my captive bred stuff) when I do classroom presentations or hands on sessions in public.

I am in this for the long run. I started doing classroom presentations at the local community college I attended when I was 19 years old. I am now 60 years old and still return to that college when asked. However I still enjoy herpetoculture also. I still breed kingsnakes and rosy boas as a hobby. I have never made a cent on them. I spend hundreds of dollars annually on materials and feed. Most of the animals I produce are given to friends and their children. For me this is fun... And I even pay an additional fee for a "Native Reptile Captive Propagation Permit" in California ($61.03 annually).

It has been a great ride....I was out looking around last night in the hills. I saw some Poorwills and a Barn owl is all. But I got to reconnect with a herping buddy.And as usual if I had seen a C. ruber, C. mitchelli, or L. getula I would have gotten out of the car and interacted with them physically. And if stopped by any LE, regardless of how long they would try to lecture me, I would not have been cited. And when I am being lectured, I enjoy turning the tables and asking them questions and educating them (because they are always younger than me). So I do not take offense at them checking to see if I am a criminal.

But all that being said, I truly enjoy picking up wild kingsnakes and rosy boas. I really have no intention to collect them, but it really takes me back to my youth when I did collect a few. For this I need a fishing license. Just like I do when I catch and release fish.

The question still stands. Why should anyone need a fishing license to pick up a reptile ? Let alone pay the same amount as a fisherman (for reasons already explained its ludicrous ). You don't need a license to snatch up a rattlesnake so why should you need one for harmless specie's ? Why are other outdoor enthusiast who interact with wildlife in the same places exempt ? If someone offered a drink and said it was 90% pure water and 10% deadly poison. Who would except and drink it? What Fish and Wildlife services have offered reptile enthusiast has been far more toxic.These goofy laws are not about conservation and never were. Its about targeting. Its about selective law enforcement. That is something you might have to eat it on but nobody should ever embrace it.

A bit about interaction. People have strange ideas about interacting with reptiles. A snake crawls from an unnaturally altered habitat to cross a roadway and some people think you shouldn't touch it because your interfering with its natural journey. The road itself creates an unnatural balance by giving predators a huge advantage. Then you have the ones that think you can disrupt a reptiles breeding pattern with casual handling and release. That's nuts.

All my internal dialogue as a 15 year old punk kid trapped inside a 29 year old adult screams "question the law, etc."

But, in the end, i just buy a license every year. I fish for rockfish and go crabbing more than herping nowadays and I firmly believe that people should follow the rules and regulations when collecting (read: catching and eating) fish. And if getting a license is part of that, I'm going to follow. Good god, my high school, spikey hair, "drink a 40oz behind a warehouse outside of a show" would be sick haha.

That being said, I've actually never cruised WW before- I'm in San Francisco and the popular roads to cruise don't really have authority pressure. I don't really like cruising unless i have to (too hot during the day, etc).

Yep... Zach, I am the same way. I was a fisherman before I was a herper. Long Beach and Seal Beach piers, and any jetty I could get on to, were just the best places to be ....And pretty much, I still fish as much as I herp.

Weird thing, in Florida some of the piers are privately owned and no license is required, but you have to pay an entry fee to fish on them (every time).

And yes Lou's stuff is great. I subscribe and get a email when he posts. He has a great attitude, and it is contagious.

I have noticed a sign posted in years passed, but never thought about not stopping for something interesting.

It's not like I go off the road though.

The other thing about Whitewater is that it is centrally located. I can't remember a time I went out and spent the night only on Whitewater. There are dozens of other well known roads "near" there. I usually make a run there at the end of my evening. If I see things, I may run 2 or 3 more times.Craig

I have noticed a sign posted in years passed, but never thought about not stopping for something interesting.

It's not like I go off the road though.

The other thing about Whitewater is that it is centrally located. I can't remember a time I went out and spent the night only on Whitewater. There are dozens of other well known roads "near" there. I usually make a run there at the end of my evening. If I see things, I may run 2 or 3 more times.Craig

agreed it a great area i still think its a good road though, i had a 4 boa night this year . but because of how busy it is i only o 3-4 times a year

In short. If you want the wrong answer to any question ask JIMI. The logic of the above analogy perfectly sums up this dopes lack of reasoning. Those things listed are products purchased for personal use or paid services for private use. You buy something and privately own and use it [/u].

You pay the light bill, pay for the water bill for your private use. You can stand under a street lamp or get a drink from a public fountain and not have to pay an additional fee.

When you buy the tire you keep the tire and use it. Its your tire. You don't have to pay to look at tires. You need a driver's license to drive a car, not to look at cars or photograph them in public places. Sheesh...........We are talking about looking at wildlife in public places. Not collecting , not searching in National, State or municipal owned parks, not making private use of them. Looking at them in Public places. No person should ever be charged or restricted from interacting with common reptiles (of all things ) in any public place. Its ludicrous to think they should.

The thing about wildlife is, it's public until you make it yours (by means of "take"). At the point of "take", you have made it private. You have to pay for that, for taking something public and making it yours. Just like water - it's a public resource, but if you want to take some out of the public reservoir and make it just yours, you have to pay for it.

Getting back to Whitewater and fake snakes and all that jazz - Ernie you can just tune out since you know it all. Other folks may not understand one or two important things that relate to field herping and road cruising. The key to interacting with law enforcement, if you're not hinky, is probable cause (PC). (Actually, I guess it's even more important to understand PC if you ARE hinky.) If they've got PC, they have the right to search you even if you don't give permission. If you've got collecting gear, they have probable cause to think you're collecting. They will in all likelihood ask you if you have a license. If you do, great. They might just ask "How's it going? You getting any?" If you do not however, they are likely to search you, ticket you, or both. This will consume anywhere from 5 minutes to, oh jeez, how much crap do you have to look through? A half-hour, easy.

Alright, here's the deal. It doesn't matter what you think of the regs, if they are dumb or shouldn't exist whatever. The regs are going to get enforced by the guys whose job it is to enforce them. They deal with what is, not with what ought to be, or what ought not to be.

If you have given probable cause to suspect you are collecting, and then show proof that you are doing it - or even just trying to do it - without a license (by not producing the license when asked), you are probably going to get a ticket. See, they cannot tell if you are truthful, or if you are a good liar. They get tons of both, and surely they tire of getting lied to, by inept liars and by skillful liars. What they see is someone who sure looks like they are ready to stick something in a bag, and that person don't have a license to do that. Which is illegal. If you are lucky they will just search you, and come up empty-handed. At that point they may ticket you, or let you off with a warning. Either is within their discretion. If you're a mouthy ass, and cop some kind of butt-hurt attitude, go figure the likely outcome, no matter how nice or decent or professional the officer is. And if you're super nice, and they aren't, you're gonna get the ticket.

Back to having a license. If you do have a license, and look like you're maybe collecting (like, by stopping to look at snakes, and also perhaps not letting an animal go on its way but instead having it corralled - or even in your hands - for photos), the enforcement officer doesn't yet have probable cause to suspect you of a violation, and therefore lacks the legal right to search you without a warrant or your permission. I'm assuming this is an animal you both need a license for, and could actually legally collect with a license (and it's not, e.g., a San Diego zonata, or a Gila monster, or the like). If the enforcement officer is a jerk, or bored, or whatever, he may try to convince you to let him search you. But you can say no and they cannot legally force the search. Usually this is what I do - nicely, but clearly. Cruising, I usually have a hook and bucket, and often some DORs. And I have a license if the state requires one. If I feel like talking to the guy (like, maybe he seems OK, and I think I can learn something about the area, the resource, or his agency...), I say "Sure, knock yourself out, let's talk while you're looking, I'll stand over here with my hands clearly in your sight."

Again, if you don't like the hunting or fishing regs there's a process to change them, and you have a seat at the table where the process takes place. But if you break them because you think they're dumb, or unfair, or were made without due process (trust me, I fully understand that any or all of these may be true...), you are still at risk of enforcement action against you. Even if you're right. So, you have to get the rules changed, or take your chances and accept what happens. If there's a real miscarriage of justice, well, raise hell. But you're going to need to convince people you're not just a lying, butt-hurt dirtbag. And that's not easy once you've got a violation or ten on your record.

So just buy that license, eh? Take it from a real dope, neither a cop nor a lawyer.

The question still stands why don't you need a "Fishing License" to play with rattlesnakes in Cali-Snowflake and you do for other reptiles ? You can road cruise and "Take" rattlesnakes everyday if you want . No extra payment / Fishing License required. The only logical reason for this discrimination is because rattlesnakes are dangerous and noisy. When Cali-Snowflake put this crap in the books the reptile guys did not have a seat at the table and still don't. But fishermen do. In Cali-Snowflake they have had enough of the over priced and over regulated Cali-Snowflake Fishing License system (more then 75% above the national average). Their tired of getting screwed. This could have an effect on the reptile crowd.

If you go fishing its reasonable to be required to have a fishing License. Cali-Snowflake has suffered a gigantic decline in fishing License sales because they have not been reasonable and its catching up with them. Financially it doesn't matter if anyone is driving around trying to find a gopher snake. The laws surrounding that are there to target and nothing else. But when people stop fishing (like they are in unprecedented numbers), that's a different story. I would think that with the financial ass kicking Cali-Snowflake is taking from the loss of fishing revenue. Something is going to have to change. The way its going they are going to have to siphon off money from the trans gender bathroom fund to make ends meet. The change (assuming) could be to increase State and local taxes so you can pay more to do the same things with greater restrictions or lower the cost of a license (in Florida its $17) to stimulate interest.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum